Page:Labour in Madras.djvu/211

185 puts up with treatments which under ordinary circumstances he would have revolted from, and invariably becomes a mere beast to dance to the tones and insolent whims of his arbitrary superior in the department. It emasoulatee the workman and emboldens the foreman to suretob the exeroise of his arbitrary power to the vanishing limit. Here I may mention a case tbat i know which has a touch of tragedy in its compittal. A workman stole a lea (120 yde,) of red yarn to make a waist thread. He was found out at the gate, brought to the manager, who, after referring to the regis ter, dismissed him without the least concern on his pars. Usually stealing of a trivial nature is punished by the same manager by a fine of a rupee or two. This particular workman had faithfully served nine years and eight mouths and he was to get as his grate uity a lump sum of Rs. 160 (€ 10) in another four months. The man, brokenbearted, went home as if to his own funeral. I wish that workmen who have put in more than five years of service be treated more generously than in the above cage by the mill authorities. CAPACITY. The inefficiency of the Indian workman is often adduced as the cause of low wages. The factory system in India is already fifty years old, and it is inconceivable that the Indian workman has made no progress. “India is the Mother Country of the textile industry and up to the time of Arkwright possessed the monopoly of fine yarns "; outside experts like Jr. James Platt and Mr. Henry Lee are of opinion that “in no country on earth, except in Lancashire, do the operatives possess such a natural leaning to the textile industry as in India"; Dr. G. Von Schultze-Gævernitz, a German expert, said in 1895 that the Indian labourer “ does not stand far behind the German ”-that was twenty-five years ago. Dr. Nair in his Minute of Dise sent to the Report of the Inlian Factory Labour Commission says: